cyberfort

Level 2
Google and Microsoft are huge
They create OS and multiple web things
They have huge resource, experience and expertise

Still they fail to make a good security product why?

Is it because they get some favors from third party security vendors?
Or its something else anyone can give a logical explanation to it?
 

XhenEd

Level 27
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Google and Microsoft are huge
They create OS and multiple web things
They have huge resource, experience and expertise

Still they fail to make a good security product why?

Is it because they get some favors from third party security vendors?
Or its something else anyone can give a logical explanation to it?
I think one of the reasons why they don't make a super effective AV that is offered for free is to prevent monopoly. Imagine if they create one that is free, AV companies out there will be in danger of falling.
 
Last edited:

Azure

Level 24
Verified
Content Creator
Google created Chrome. Which I believe set a standard for security that other browsers are trying emulate. Google Chrome runs sandboxed, later Microsoft created their own sandbox called Appcontainer, and now even Firefox is trying to catch on.

Google focuses in trying to make their browser as secure as possible. I don't think they will ever bothered with an AV (though it could be interesting if they did).
 

Winter Soldier

Level 25
I think one of the reasons why they don't make a super effective AV that is offered for free is to prevent monopoly. Imagine if they create one that is free, other AVs out there will be in danger of crashing.
That is what I think too, WD, Smartscreen and other technologies are effective without doubt, especially after the latest implementation, but a there is a "calculated stop", not going over.
If you want more control and more options then you can rely on third-party AVs in a free market.
 

EASTER

Level 3
Verified
I think one of the reasons why they don't make a super effective AV that is offered for free is to prevent monopoly. Imagine if they create one that is free, other AVs out there will be in danger of crashing.
The whole concept from my point of view was for M$ (dunno about google yet) to fashion a basic framework and allow for the creation of companies/individual vendors to build upon that framework as to do with security. At least that's how it's been going forward since first distributions.

Where would all those security industries end up if M$ suddenly decided to absorb all those years of efforts and c0de from those vendors and integrate them directly to their own O/S completely?

That being said they do now seem to be putting quite the effort into WD for one and working Mitigation Techniques into it like never before.

Which should take some of the edge off of them from getting bashed so often for their so called lack of interest in building better security into those other predecessor systems.
 

RVS2

Level 2
They probably can make a highly effective av but are advanced enough to know that it's not enough anymore. They'd rather make a good usable email and software which is slightly vulnerable, than make highly secure software which compromises ease of use.
 

Fritz

Level 11
Easily explained; they're not in the security product business. They create frameworks in order to produce revenue.

Of course they can't leave it wide open for hackers and malware, because then their products won't sell. But why would they go all out and waste valuable ressources on it?
 

Spawn

Administrator
Verified
Staff member
Fail?? :rolleyes:
Both Microsoft and Google implement security into their products by design.

Have you never heard of Safe Browsing (by Google) or Smartscreen (Microsoft)?

Safe Browsing is integrated with many Google services including Android, Chrome, Gmail and Drive before you download files. Other browser such as Apple Safari and Mozilla Firefox. Whereas Smartscreen is limited to Windows-products like Windows 10, Store, OneDrive, Microsoft Edge and was added to Internet Explorer in version 8 (discontinued). And there's more I probably missed..

Something to read about the Chrome browser:
About Smartscreen:
 

DJ Panda

Level 29
Verified
MS is quietly removing the need of 3rd party security products

- Windows 8/10 : Windows Defender (AV) & smartscreen system wide (cloud rep)
- Windows 10 ENT : Windows Defender ATP (kind of behavioral mechanism)
- Windows 10 CU : SS with block option (Anti-exe)
- next build: EMET integration (Anti-exploit)
It would be cool, but is the Anti-Exploit protection just theory or they actually announcing that? :)
 

Andy Ful

Level 47
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Google and Microsoft are huge
They create OS and multiple web things
They have huge resource, experience and expertise

Still they fail to make a good security product why?
Zeus and Hera are GODS.
They created a world and multiple other things.
They have huge resource, experience and expertise.

Still they fail to make a good MAN, why?
And, what does is mean to be a good MAN?

Edit.
I think that both security products and the MAN are pretty good.:)
 
Last edited:

Azure

Level 24
Verified
Content Creator

liubomirwm

Level 5
Google are not going to create an antivirus to protect their competitor's OS Windows. It simply isn't their job, and there are many good companies already offering such a product. Sure, Google has great engineers and data analysts, has money and knows how to get the job done. But it isn't their job to secure a competitor's OS. However, they do many things and vigorously try to protect services and products they offer. Google not only has great engineers, it has great managers/CEOs. They know that building an OS to compete with Windows is going to be very costly, and very risky approach. They might get a positive revenue from this, but they really aren't that hungry for money, they have money. The fact is that 80% they will not be able to outrun Microsoft at their very own game. And they don't feel they need to. Chromebooks are maintained and secured of course. On the other side, you can't say that Microsoft is not investing in security and not doing good things. However their model was different in the not so distant past. They had special partner programs to support 3rd party AV vendors like MAPP and some others. They also had a special page which you could open from the notification about missing AV the first time you started your OS after installation, which lists different AV vendors. You get it?
 

AtlBo

Level 27
Verified
Content Creator
Honestly, I think MS has one eye on the user experience and one eye on the security of a user's system. The company doesn't want to be by default to blame for sluggish performance. To date, I would say this is why MS security has not been the best. Guess we will have to see in the future how it will be. MS will have alot to manage working with so many protection vectors being developed (as mentioned by @Umbra) over such a broad scope of user expectations for system performance and then too ease of use in some/many cases with PC users...
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 178

  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo and XhenEd

EASTER

Level 3
Verified
Honestly, I think MS has one eye on the user experience and one eye on the security of a user's system. The company doesn't want to be by default to blame for sluggish performance. To date, I would say this is why MS security has not been the best. Guess we will have to see in the future how it will be. MS will have alot to manage working with so many protection vectors being developed (as mentioned by @Umbra) over such a broad scope of user expectations for system performance and then too ease of use in some/many cases with PC users...
Good Point!

How often in the earlier platforms have users complained of that exact issue. Now add all the juicy fruit on top of things, printers, faxes, not to mention document editing and formulating programs and especially those video heads who really put a load on windows computer system(s) and it's time to check through at the weigh station or Crash*.

You're deduction seems reasonable enough to me AtlBo. It's been quite the balancing act and security is suffered the most, but they do seem to have taken a much more (dare I say) aggressive form of newfound ambition to much better secure things in Windows 10 from what I seen so far.

That said and if balanced well and efficient enough, it could also maybe help those third party security programs not to have to carry so much of that burden on themselves too.

Really interesting developments are beginning to take some shape. How far will it go and will they be enough to make for a more user friendly and safer experience going forward?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo and XhenEd